World of Warcraft blamed for 69 murders

[Gilgondorin]

http://news.yahoo.com/prosecutors-killer-played-world-warcraft-7-hours-per-202755037--abc-news-topstories.html

I guess I'm broken or something. Back in high school I would play Gears of War for 4-5 hours a day on school days, and 11-12 on weekends and holidays, and that game is like 11 times gorier than World of Warcraft ever was. Some of the kill methods are so graphic that 1 and 2 were banned in like 7 countries.... But I didn't go out and massacre a bunch of completely innocent people like THIS nut job did.

Either the media is searching for something to demonize (as usual), or his parents dropped the ball somewhere and all accountability died with his victims.

[unsub073]

Anytime video games or certain rock bands are mentioned, the media always grasps for those straws, and they end up looking like idiots b/c most of them have never played said game or listened to said band.

[BG1960]

LEEEEROY JEN-KINSSS!!!   

Leeroy Jenkins

[lrdplatypus]

When asked about his interest in the game by a prosecutor, Breivik angrily dismissed the idea that playing World of Warcraft had any connection to his attacks, according to media reports.

"It is not relevant to this case whatsoever," Breivik said, getting so upset that he threatened to turn off his microphone, according to Norwegian newspaper Verdens Gang.

Its pretty sad when the murder has more sense than the prosecution or the media! 

In all seriousness though, this can be taken as a really interesting commentary on Norwegian society. Norwegian society is one of the most, if not the most, secularized societies in the world. In absence of a cultural notion of sin, all immoral acts tend to be treated as the symptoms of some disease that can be cured. Accordingly the Norwegian Justice System and penal system is set up not so much to punish immoral behavior, but to reform and "cure" the convicted. This is why their prisons are so plush and their sentencing so light. Breivik, for the murder of 77 people, is facing a maximum sentence of 21 years in prison.

With all that in mind it is really interesting to watch the Norwegians attempt to figure out what to do with Breivik. They are desperately looking for something other than him that they can blame his actions on. Because at the end of the day, if they can't find something else to blame those 77 murders on, they'll have to admit to themselves that there actually is such a thing as evil and it can't be treated medically or psychologically.

Its almost comical, in a tragic sense. I read this story and see a country desperately trying to cling to their worldview which denies the existence of evil despite being faced with tremendous evil. So they see that Breivik played video games and latch onto that. "Did the video games break you?" they ask, wanting him to say yes. This makes Breivik angry because he committed those murders to carry out his own twisted sense of justice. He wants to make a point, which he cannot if the justice system treats him like a patient instead of a competent, albeit evil, adult.

Sorry that rambled on, I just thought this story is an interesting commentary on their society.

[lightskye]

In all seriousness though, this can be taken as a really interesting commentary on Norwegian society. Norwegian society is one of the most, if not the most, secularized societies in the world. In absence of a cultural notion of sin, all immoral acts tend to be treated as the symptoms of some disease that can be cured. Accordingly the Norwegian Justice System and penal system is set up not so much to punish immoral behavior, but to reform and "cure" the convicted. This is why their prisons are so plush and their sentencing so light. Breivik, for the murder of 77 people, is facing a maximum sentence of 21 years in prison.

I hadn't heard about his possible maximum sentencing (21 years) until you just mentioned it.  Yeah, that's pretty messed up.  I did some further researching and came upon this article from the NY Times (regarding Breivik and Norway's prison system).  Make of it what you will.

Source:  http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/anders-breivik/

If the court finds him insane, Mr. Breivik will be kept under forced psychiatric care “for as long as his illness persists” (possibly the rest of his life). Otherwise, Mr. Breivik’s maximum sentence will be 21 years, although a judge can extend his incarceration after that point if he’s still considered dangerous.

After reading that, it sounds like the prosecution asked him that question in an attempt to demonstrate that he's mentally unstable (in order to keep him locked up for a lifetime).  Not necessarily to lay blame on video games (though time will tell for sure where they're going with this).


What is very interesting, however, is this next part:

Our prisons are degrading and dangerous. A 2005 commission found that more than a million people had been sexually assaulted in prisons over a twenty-year period. They’re also overcrowded, which is hardly surprising since America has 751 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, or roughly 2.3 million people behind bars, more than any other country. Harsh conditions don’t seem to deter criminals, or prevent recidivism. Nearly 60 percent of former convicts end up back in jail after two years.

Norway has 71 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, with prisons that resemble “college dorms,” according to a Daily Beast article from last year. A maximum-security facility for murderers and rapists close to the Swedish border has “mint-green walls and IKEA-style furniture in varnished natural wood…Each cell comes with a flat-screen TV, a private bath, and a large unbarred window.”  Seems like a waste of money. And yet these cushy accommodations don’t attract repeat visitors. Only 20 percent of former convicts end up back in jail after two years.

I can hear people saying, what has Norway got to do with anything? It’s a small country with a historically low crime rate. That’s true. But it’s worth noting that America’s vastly greater experience with crime has not made us any better at dealing with it.

They must be doing SOMETHING right.

[Gilgondorin]

What is very interesting, however, is this next part:

Our prisons are degrading and dangerous. A 2005 commission found that more than a million people had been sexually assaulted in prisons over a twenty-year period. They’re also overcrowded, which is hardly surprising since America has 751 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, or roughly 2.3 million people behind bars, more than any other country. Harsh conditions don’t seem to deter criminals, or prevent recidivism. Nearly 60 percent of former convicts end up back in jail after two years.

Norway has 71 prisoners per 100,000 inhabitants, with prisons that resemble “college dorms,” according to a Daily Beast article from last year. A maximum-security facility for murderers and rapists close to the Swedish border has “mint-green walls and IKEA-style furniture in varnished natural wood…Each cell comes with a flat-screen TV, a private bath, and a large unbarred window.”  Seems like a waste of money. And yet these cushy accommodations don’t attract repeat visitors. Only 20 percent of former convicts end up back in jail after two years.

I can hear people saying, what has Norway got to do with anything? It’s a small country with a historically low crime rate. That’s true. But it’s worth noting that America’s vastly greater experience with crime has not made us any better at dealing with it.

They must be doing SOMETHING right.

I'm willing to bet it is due to the fact that Norway likely doesn't ostracize convicted felons like the United States does. If you get convicted of a felony here in the states, you're a felon for life; that usually means that people who DO want to turn over a new leaf can't because employers turn away people with a criminal record. Since they can't get a job that even pays living wage, a lot of them turn back to the habits that put them in prison again in the first place (IE: Robbery, drugs, alcoholism, etc) or so the theory goes.

Judging by what lrdplatypus said, it doesn't sound like they really care about your criminal background so long as they think you won't do it again in Norway. Probably a lot more opportunities for inmates there than here.

[lightskye]

I'm willing to bet it is due to the fact that Norway likely doesn't ostracize convicted felons like the United States does. If you get convicted of a felony here in the states, you're a felon for life; that usually means that people who DO want to turn over a new leaf can't because employers turn away people with a criminal record. Since they can't get a job that even pays living wage, a lot of them turn back to the habits that put them in prison again in the first place (IE: Robbery, drugs, alcoholism, etc) or so the theory goes.

Judging by what lrdplatypus said, it doesn't sound like they really care about your criminal background so long as they think you won't do it again in Norway. Probably a lot more opportunities for inmates there than here.

Hmm...that's a good point.  I hate to admit it but, while I would want them to reform their lives, I wouldn't want to hire a convicted felon (at least 99 times out of 100) neither.  At the very least, it beats my off-the-top theory that it's just too damn cold to commit crimes in Norway. 

[lrdplatypus]

Its also possible that our prison population is inflated because of the drug war. We throw non-violent offenders in prison, that's unheard of in Norway, as far as I am aware.

Though the "too damn cold" theory merits consideration. 

[Jeb_66]

Complete craziness to blame it on anything but him. Games? Really?

[tenring]

In all seriousness though, this can be taken as a really interesting commentary on Norwegian society. Norwegian society is one of the most, if not the most, secularized societies in the world. In absence of a cultural notion of sin, all immoral acts tend to be treated as the symptoms of some disease that can be cured.

...ummm...yeah....because non-secular societies tend to be so peaceful and loving and sin-free....riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhht.

[lrdplatypus]

In all seriousness though, this can be taken as a really interesting commentary on Norwegian society. Norwegian society is one of the most, if not the most, secularized societies in the world. In absence of a cultural notion of sin, all immoral acts tend to be treated as the symptoms of some disease that can be cured.

...ummm...yeah....because non-secular societies tend to be so peaceful and loving and sin-free....riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhht.

You misunderstand the point. This was about how a post-Christian society understands Justice. Not about the relative sinfulness of secularized and non-secularized societies.

In a post-Christian society such as Norway's, the concept of human depravity is thrown out the window. If anyone does something wrong, it is because there is something wrong with that person. The person is damaged and must be fixed. Punishing them is useless, you might as well punish someone for having cancer! The role of Justice in this worldview is to cure the disease.

Contrast that with the Judeo-Christian worldview, which has a clear understanding that people are responsible for their actions, and that humanity is depraved, and that everyone is capable of both great evil and great good. It then follows that Justice is best served when people face the consequences of their actions. If you choose to kill someone, you forfeit your life. If you steal something, you must make restitution. etc.

America is currently a Christian society in the sense that our laws and our concept of Justice are heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian creeds. That is not to say that everyone in a Christian society is actually a Christian, just that society is heavily influenced by it. Norway is an example of what happens when a society moves beyond that and becomes post-Christian.

[jared]

In all seriousness though, this can be taken as a really interesting commentary on Norwegian society. Norwegian society is one of the most, if not the most, secularized societies in the world. In absence of a cultural notion of sin, all immoral acts tend to be treated as the symptoms of some disease that can be cured.

...ummm...yeah....because non-secular societies tend to be so peaceful and loving and sin-free....riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiggggggghhhhhht.

You misunderstand the point. This was about how a post-Christian society understands Justice. Not about the relative sinfulness of secularized and non-secularized societies.

In a post-Christian society such as Norway's, the concept of human depravity is thrown out the window. If anyone does something wrong, it is because there is something wrong with that person. The person is damaged and must be fixed. Punishing them is useless, you might as well punish someone for having cancer! The role of Justice in this worldview is to cure the disease.

Contrast that with the Judeo-Christian worldview, which has a clear understanding that people are responsible for their actions, and that humanity is depraved, and that everyone is capable of both great evil and great good. It then follows that Justice is best served when people face the consequences of their actions. If you choose to kill someone, you forfeit your life. If you steal something, you must make restitution. etc.

America is currently a Christian society in the sense that our laws and our concept of Justice are heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian creeds. That is not to say that everyone in a Christian society is actually a Christian, just that society is heavily influenced by it. Norway is an example of what happens when a society moves beyond that and becomes post-Christian.

Well said!

[lightskye]

In a post-Christian society such as Norway's, the concept of human depravity is thrown out the window. If anyone does something wrong, it is because there is something wrong with that person. The person is damaged and must be fixed. Punishing them is useless, you might as well punish someone for having cancer! The role of Justice in this worldview is to cure the disease.

Contrast that with the Judeo-Christian worldview, which has a clear understanding that people are responsible for their actions, and that humanity is depraved, and that everyone is capable of both great evil and great good. It then follows that Justice is best served when people face the consequences of their actions. If you choose to kill someone, you forfeit your life. If you steal something, you must make restitution. etc.

America is currently a Christian society in the sense that our laws and our concept of Justice are heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian creeds. That is not to say that everyone in a Christian society is actually a Christian, just that society is heavily influenced by it. Norway is an example of what happens when a society moves beyond that and becomes post-Christian.

So...which way is more effective?

I will admit that whenever I hear of heinous crimes (murder, rape, etc.), my knee-jerk reaction is to want the offender to get the maximum penalty (max length in prison or death).  Hell, I even liked that AZ sheriff's idea of tent prisons and taking away their coffee.  But in the end, I just want crime to stop (or at least significantly reduce it).

After I read that Norway's population-to-prisoner rate is 10% what ours is (based on the U.S.'s 100,000:751 and Norway's 100,000:71 statistic) and their recidivism rate after two years is also much lower than ours (U.S.'s almost 60% repeat offenders compared to Norway's 20%), I'd love to know if there's anything we can learn from them.

[Domineaux]

Interesting comment about the condition of Norwegian society compared to the US:

Most crime is committed by those with IQ's between 80 and 90. The average male in Norway has an IQ of over 100. America has a dumber society. A recent NEAP test showed most students in 8th grade doling poorly, but blacks doing worse with only 10% at grade level. A quarter of our adult population can't read and understand this articl;e. This promises a higher percentage of crime for America, simply based on the intellect of our criminals. In contrast everyone reads well in Norway.

We remain a nation at risk...though Norway's crime has increased 700% since 1950. that's not good, and is attributed to its increasing immigrant/welfare population. Sound familiar?

Looking at statistics, Norway has near 100% literacy and near 95% homogeneous society which I agree likely has a huge influence on the low crime rates.

[Gilgondorin]

Norway also a much lower total population than the U.S, which skews the statistics.

Consider the opposite scenario, in that the city of Los Angeles, which had more crime in 2006 than the entire states of North Dakota, Montana, Nevada, and several other states did that whole year. Nevada had 120,544   crimes, versus Los Angeles' 135,985. Does that mean BOTH are active war zones, or just Los Angeles because of its smaller geographic size?

(lol.... War zones.... It sucks to live in California. )

[lightskye]

Norway also a much lower total population than the U.S, which skews the statistics.

Consider the opposite scenario, in that the city of Los Angeles, which had more crime in 2006 than the entire states of North Dakota, Montana, Nevada, and several other states did that whole year. Nevada had 120,544   crimes, versus Los Angeles' 135,985. Does that mean BOTH are active war zones, or just Los Angeles because of its smaller geographic size?

(lol.... War zones.... It sucks to live in California. )

Total population shouldn't matter when comparing crime rates per 100,000 people.

[Domineaux]

Norway also a much lower total population than the U.S, which skews the statistics.

Consider the opposite scenario, in that the city of Los Angeles, which had more crime in 2006 than the entire states of North Dakota, Montana, Nevada, and several other states did that whole year. Nevada had 120,544   crimes, versus Los Angeles' 135,985. Does that mean BOTH are active war zones, or just Los Angeles because of its smaller geographic size?

(lol.... War zones.... It sucks to live in California. )

Total population shouldn't matter when comparing crime rates per 100,000 people.

True but density does impact crime and the most populous city in Norway is less than half a million compared to the US which has 9 cities over 1m and 33 over .5m with the largest being NY with over 8m.

[Gilgondorin]

Total population shouldn't matter when comparing crime rates per 100,000 people.

I wasn't comparing per 100,000 people. Los Angeles is literally more dangerous than all of North Dakota is three times over, Montana once, or Nevada once.

[texanron]

LEEEEROY JEN-KINSSS!!!   


Leeroy Jenkins

I haven't seen this video in years! Nice pull BG1960!

[tenring]

at least i have chickens.